Gita Explained
Arjuna speaks1.33

येषामर्थे काङ्क्षितं नो राज्यं भोगाः सुखानि च।त इमेऽवस्थिता युद्धे प्राणांस्त्यक्त्वा धनानि च॥

yeṣām arthe kāṅkṣitaṃ no rājyaṃ bhogāḥ sukhāni cata ime ’vasthitā yuddhe prāṇāṃs tyaktvā dhanāni ca

Word by word
yeṣāmfor whosearthesakekāṅkṣitamcoveted fornaḥby usrājyamkingdombhogāḥpleasuressukhānihappinesscaalsotetheyimetheseavasthitāḥsituatedyuddhefor battleprāṇānlivestyaktvāgiving updhanāniwealthcaalso

The verse says

Those for whose sake we want kingdom, comforts and pleasures — they are standing here in battle, giving up their lives and their wealth.

In plain words

Here is his strongest argument, and it is a good one.

Why does anyone want a kingdom? For the people you would share it with. And those people are standing in the opposite line, about to die.

So the prize cannot be collected. Winning would mean holding a kingdom after killing everyone you wanted it for.

Where you've felt this · at work

Years of long hours to build something for your family, and by the time it is built the family has rearranged itself around your absence. The thing is finished. The reason it was started is not there any more.

Going deeper

This is the best thinking Arjuna does in the chapter, and it deserves saying so.

He has spotted that the value of an outcome depends on who is left to share it. A throne is not a thing on its own; it is a position among people. Empty the people out and the throne is furniture.

It is also a devastating description of how ambition tends to work. The reason gets consumed by the pursuit. He is looking at the extreme form of it — the people he wanted the kingdom for are being killed in the act of winning it — but the ordinary form is familiar enough.

The Gita does not answer this by disputing it. Krishna never claims the kingdom is worth having. What he disputes is the assumption underneath: that the act must be justified by what it produces. Take that away and Arjuna's argument, correct as it is, no longer settles anything.